Could it have been the water?

"Carmen" wrote in message
...

On 13-Sep-2004, "Perple Gyrl" wrote:

"Carmen" wrote in message
...
On 13-Sep-2004, "Perple Gyrl" wrote:

They are normal looking people. Average looking, members of
the
middle part of the bell curve. Just like Ig. Just like me.
No
talking room
there.

How is your opinion not subjective?

Um, in this portion of the post you were replying to (that you
snipped
so I'm adding it back in so you can read it this time) I said my
opinion *was* subjective:

Jennifer:
I don't really care what your opinion of his looks are as it is
just
as subjective as jmk's and pg's. It doesn't make you any more
correct than anyone else regardless of how you try to spin it.

Carmen:
Exactly. We all have the right to our own opinions. Theirs is no
more correct than mine just because they dislike Ig."

To my husband (and other men
I've dated), I am very beautiful. I just don't go posting a
high,
subjective, opinion of my looks to this ng.

Pardon? You just said you are thought of as being "very
beautiful".
That is a "high, subjective opinion" of your looks. On this NG no
less.

You just saw pictures of me at my highest
weight and after just working out at my lowest. I doubt that is
enough to base anyone's opinion on.

You disagree with my opinion of you and Ig and JMK and myself all
falling within the "average" portion of the bellcurve as far as
looks
go? That means the middle ~68% of looks. Do you think you fall
in
the top ~15% or the bottom ~15%?

Carmen

This thread is getting ridiculous.... Personally, I am done with
it.

As you like. The point has been made.

Keep telling yourself that!! ta ta

Carmen

"Carmen" wrote in message
...

You and JMK clearly meant to imply he was unattractive - physically
unattractive as evidenced by the reference to photographs.
I got involved for the same reason I usually do. Something was said
that I disagreed with. If you'll check you'll see that my own history
with Ig isn't all wine and roses.
There's something that I don't think you see here. A mistake I've
made myself. Ig isn't that complex. He says what he's thinking.
When I finally realized I was ascribing hidden meanings to what he
wrote (because most people use language that way) and started reading
them straight forward all of a sudden he made sense. Every once in a
while someone says exactly what they mean. No sugarcoating. The
"whys" vary (people with Asperger's Syndrome do this - one of my
daughter's friends is an Aspie) but if you can identify them you'll
save yourself a whole lot of crap.

Please refresh my memory and let me know where I made any references to his
photographs? I stopped checking out his website after he posted the
irrelevant chicken coop pictures and pictures of his house. I didn't even
go to his website to see his updated photos. I don't need to see his face
and/or body to wonder why he thinks that he is attractive.

Well I am very complex.... please try to figure out what I am thinking now


Carmen

On 13-Sep-2004, "JMA" wrote:

Their responses *were* out of line. As for my response to them,
if you'd read the thread you'd see this:
"Hmmm. You'll have to point out where I made a disparaging remark
about someone else's looks. Oh, that's right. I didn't. At most I
intimated that PG and JMK were not *more* attractive than Ig. BTW,
my jpegs are where they've been for quite some time. Just Google
for
them."

Pretty plain english. I said PG and JMK are not *more* attractive
than Ig. They both implied Ig is ugly - a POV I clearly do not
hold.
Since from my POV Ig isn't ugly, my stating that PG and JMK aren't
*more* attractive than Ig is a statement. Not a dig, as their
comments about Ig clearly were. At no time did I deny any of my
prior statements.

They never said they were more attractive only that they disagreed
with his high opinion of himself. It wasn't until you jumped in that
one of
them chose to blunt about it.

They are adults, and as such fully responsible for their behavior.
Don't put that one off on me.

Apparently you aren't the one reading the thread. Your remarks
about them not having "talking room" based on *their* photos was
just as
inferential about their looks as their comments about his. That's
what you
wanted pointed out to you, there is it.

We disagree on that point. Someone could infer a negative connotation
if they like. If I'd meant it that way I'd have said so. I have not
done so, nor would I. Neither one of them is a supermodel. They are
normal looking people. Average looking, members of the middle part of
the bell curve. Just like Ig. Just like me. No talking room there.

I don't really care what your opinion of his looks are as it is just
as subjective as jmk's and pg's. It doesn't make you any more
correct
than anyone else regardless of how you try to spin it.

Exactly. We all have the right to our own opinions. Theirs is no
more correct than mine just because they dislike Ig.

You apparently though are one of those people who just has to be
right even in the face of
your own words - just like ignoramus - which is the problem most of
us have
with him.

I'm unwilling to concede an argument when I'm not convinced I'm wrong.
Google and you'll find instances where I did when I was.

Oh, and you don't hide yourself from google and then challenge
people to find things you said months
ago...

My philosophy concerning Google is that I don't write things I'm
unwilling to take ownership of. Makes things simpler.

Carmen

"Carmen" wrote in message
...

On 13-Sep-2004, "Perple Gyrl" wrote:

"Carmen" wrote in message
...

Their responses *were* out of line. As for my response to them,
if
you'd read the thread you'd see this:
"Hmmm. You'll have to point out where I made a disparaging remark
about someone else's looks. Oh, that's right. I didn't. At most I
intimated that PG and JMK were not *more* attractive than Ig. BTW,
my
jpegs are where they've been for quite some time. Just Google for
them."
Pretty plain english. I said PG and JMK are not *more* attractive
than Ig. They both implied Ig is ugly - a POV I clearly do not
hold.
Since from my POV Ig isn't ugly, my stating that PG and JMK aren't
*more* attractive than Ig is a statement. Not a dig, as their
comments about Ig clearly were. At no time did I deny any of my
prior
statements.
Carmen

I never implied he was ugly.... with his personality, ego and
posting
style... he is one of the most unattractive people that I "know".
When did
either of us say ugly? Why are you getting involved in this, you
don't know
the history I've had (any many other people have) with that
jerk-off.

You and JMK clearly meant to imply he was unattractive - physically
unattractive as evidenced by the reference to photographs.
I got involved for the same reason I usually do. Something was said
that I disagreed with. If you'll check you'll see that my own history
with Ig isn't all wine and roses.
There's something that I don't think you see here. A mistake I've
made myself. Ig isn't that complex. He says what he's thinking.
When I finally realized I was ascribing hidden meanings to what he
wrote (because most people use language that way) and started reading
them straight forward all of a sudden he made sense. Every once in a
while someone says exactly what they mean. No sugarcoating. The
"whys" vary (people with Asperger's Syndrome do this - one of my
daughter's friends is an Aspie) but if you can identify them you'll
save yourself a whole lot of crap.

Carmen

Something I'm getting a little weary of is people thinking the problem is
only straighforwardness. It isn't that at all. It's the nasty little cheap
shots, inappropriate ng behavior, and the fact that he has decided that he
will be the expert on all things there are to know and those who disagree
will be argued to the barest of semantic level - because he's never wrong.
He says completely stupid and outrageous stuff and then goes and puts down
anything that he doesn't agree with or that contradicts what he is doing
personally. He picks and chooses information that meets his needs and
disregards the rest of the facts. When someone points out the flaws in his
argument, or even calls him on the carpet for nasty remarks, he killfiles
them and then proceeds to take subtle cheap shots at them when he can get
away with it.

Dally is blunt and straightforward and not always tactful and yet I
completely respect and admire her opinion even if I don't always agree with
her. There are others here who are the same (hi Jayjay!). The problem
isn't with the bluntness or straightforwardness...it is the bull**** of
being called irrational or told one is "not dealing with reality" for simply
disagreeing with one of his opinions or speculations. What could be more
irrational than calling oneself an ignoramus and then getting upset when
people agree?

I know children and adults with Aspberger's. They aren't completely
self-absorbed like this clown is. He has said things that have hurt people
I really like and admire and it just ****es me off. I also know I'm not
alone in this because I use a working email and I get plenty of feedback
from people I don't even know in this group who either were former posters
turned off by him and his crap or lurkers who don't care to post.

I'm seriously not interested in driving this farther into the ground. We
can debate the theory of what beauty or attractiveness is, whether or not
water is useful in weight loss, or pedometers, but enough bandwith has been
wasted on this self-proclaimed egomaniacal ignorant person. (he called
himself an egomaniac)

Jenn

"Carmen" wrote in message
...

On 13-Sep-2004, "Perple Gyrl" wrote:

"Carmen" wrote in message
...

Their responses *were* out of line. As for my response to them,
if
you'd read the thread you'd see this:
"Hmmm. You'll have to point out where I made a disparaging remark
about someone else's looks. Oh, that's right. I didn't. At most I
intimated that PG and JMK were not *more* attractive than Ig. BTW,
my
jpegs are where they've been for quite some time. Just Google for
them."
Pretty plain english. I said PG and JMK are not *more* attractive
than Ig. They both implied Ig is ugly - a POV I clearly do not
hold.
Since from my POV Ig isn't ugly, my stating that PG and JMK aren't
*more* attractive than Ig is a statement. Not a dig, as their
comments about Ig clearly were. At no time did I deny any of my
prior
statements.
Carmen

I never implied he was ugly.... with his personality, ego and
posting
style... he is one of the most unattractive people that I "know".
When did
either of us say ugly? Why are you getting involved in this, you
don't know
the history I've had (any many other people have) with that
jerk-off.

You and JMK clearly meant to imply he was unattractive - physically
unattractive as evidenced by the reference to photographs.
I got involved for the same reason I usually do. Something was said
that I disagreed with. If you'll check you'll see that my own history
with Ig isn't all wine and roses.
There's something that I don't think you see here. A mistake I've
made myself. Ig isn't that complex. He says what he's thinking.
When I finally realized I was ascribing hidden meanings to what he
wrote (because most people use language that way) and started reading
them straight forward all of a sudden he made sense. Every once in a
while someone says exactly what they mean. No sugarcoating. The
"whys" vary (people with Asperger's Syndrome do this - one of my
daughter's friends is an Aspie) but if you can identify them you'll
save yourself a whole lot of crap.

Carmen

Something I'm getting a little weary of is people thinking the problem is
only straighforwardness. It isn't that at all. It's the nasty little cheap
shots, inappropriate ng behavior, and the fact that he has decided that he
will be the expert on all things there are to know and those who disagree
will be argued to the barest of semantic level - because he's never wrong.
He says completely stupid and outrageous stuff and then goes and puts down
anything that he doesn't agree with or that contradicts what he is doing
personally. He picks and chooses information that meets his needs and
disregards the rest of the facts. When someone points out the flaws in his
argument, or even calls him on the carpet for nasty remarks, he killfiles
them and then proceeds to take subtle cheap shots at them when he can get
away with it.

Dally is blunt and straightforward and not always tactful and yet I
completely respect and admire her opinion even if I don't always agree with
her. There are others here who are the same (hi Jayjay!). The problem
isn't with the bluntness or straightforwardness...it is the bull**** of
being called irrational or told one is "not dealing with reality" for simply
disagreeing with one of his opinions or speculations. What could be more
irrational than calling oneself an ignoramus and then getting upset when
people agree?

I know children and adults with Aspberger's. They aren't completely
self-absorbed like this clown is. He has said things that have hurt people
I really like and admire and it just ****es me off. I also know I'm not
alone in this because I use a working email and I get plenty of feedback
from people I don't even know in this group who either were former posters
turned off by him and his crap or lurkers who don't care to post.

I'm seriously not interested in driving this farther into the ground. We
can debate the theory of what beauty or attractiveness is, whether or not
water is useful in weight loss, or pedometers, but enough bandwith has been
wasted on this self-proclaimed egomaniacal ignorant person. (he called
himself an egomaniac)

Jenn

"Carmen" wrote in message
...

They are normal looking people. Average looking, members of the middle
part of
the bell curve. Just like Ig. Just like me. No talking room there.

How is your opinion not subjective? To my husband (and other men I've
dated), I am very beautiful. I just don't go posting a high, subjective,
opinion of my looks to this ng. You just saw pictures of me at my highest
weight and after just working out at my lowest. I doubt that is enough to
base anyone's opinion on.

Carmen

"Carmen" wrote in message
...

On 13-Sep-2004, "JMA" wrote:


Oh, and you don't hide yourself from google and then challenge
people to find things you said months
ago...

My philosophy concerning Google is that I don't write things I'm
unwilling to take ownership of. Makes things simpler.

Carmen

Amen to that. See, we can agree on *some* things.

BTW, I'm not against people who don't want to archive, just the ones like Ig
who challenge people to show where he said something when he knows it's not
archived. Oh, and of course the fact that some of his buddies pull up old,
archived stuff to use against people he doesn't like. It's happened.

--
Jenn
"There may be more to learn from climbing the same mountain a hundred
times than by climbing a hundred different mountains." - Richard Nelson

"Carmen" wrote in message
...

On 13-Sep-2004, "JMA" wrote:


Oh, and you don't hide yourself from google and then challenge
people to find things you said months
ago...

My philosophy concerning Google is that I don't write things I'm
unwilling to take ownership of. Makes things simpler.

Carmen

Amen to that. See, we can agree on *some* things.

BTW, I'm not against people who don't want to archive, just the ones like Ig
who challenge people to show where he said something when he knows it's not
archived. Oh, and of course the fact that some of his buddies pull up old,
archived stuff to use against people he doesn't like. It's happened.

--
Jenn
"There may be more to learn from climbing the same mountain a hundred
times than by climbing a hundred different mountains." - Richard Nelson

"Perple Gyrl" wrote in message
...

"Carmen" wrote in message
...

They are normal looking people. Average looking, members of the middle
part of
the bell curve. Just like Ig. Just like me. No talking room there.

How is your opinion not subjective? To my husband (and other men I've
dated), I am very beautiful. I just don't go posting a high, subjective,
opinion of my looks to this ng. You just saw pictures of me at my highest
weight and after just working out at my lowest. I doubt that is enough to
base anyone's opinion on.

Well, my DH thought you were "hot" in that red dress... (his words, not
mine)

Jenn

On 13-Sep-2004, "Perple Gyrl" wrote:

They are normal looking people. Average looking, members of the
middle part of the bell curve. Just like Ig. Just like me. No
talking room
there.

How is your opinion not subjective?

Um, in this portion of the post you were replying to (that you snipped
so I'm adding it back in so you can read it this time) I said my
opinion *was* subjective:

Jennifer:
I don't really care what your opinion of his looks are as it is just
as subjective as jmk's and pg's. It doesn't make you any more
correct than anyone else regardless of how you try to spin it.

Carmen:
Exactly. We all have the right to our own opinions. Theirs is no
more correct than mine just because they dislike Ig."

To my husband (and other men
I've dated), I am very beautiful. I just don't go posting a high,
subjective, opinion of my looks to this ng.

Pardon? You just said you are thought of as being "very beautiful".
That is a "high, subjective opinion" of your looks. On this NG no
less.

You just saw pictures of me at my highest
weight and after just working out at my lowest. I doubt that is
enough to base anyone's opinion on.

You disagree with my opinion of you and Ig and JMK and myself all
falling within the "average" portion of the bellcurve as far as looks
go? That means the middle ~68% of looks. Do you think you fall in
the top ~15% or the bottom ~15%?

Carmen